Fox News: Sources close to O’Keefe say it’s “not a case of wiretapping”

posted at 4:26 pm on January 27, 2010 by Allahpundit

Offered as atonement for my own sloppiness in describing what happened yesterday in Louisiana. Breitbart is right: The affidavit didn’t accuse the group of “wiretapping” but of “willfully and maliciously interfering” with a government phone system, which may mean something less sinister in practice (albeit possibly still in violation of the statute). Sorry for the error. If it’s any consolation, WaPo’s reporter made the same mistake — the same reporter, in fact, who famously made the mistake (later corrected) of claiming O’Keefe had a racial motive in targeting ACORN. Fancy that.

You’ll be pleased to know that ace reporter David Shuster is on his way to New Orleans to report on this story firsthand, although it’s not clear why: On Twitter yesterday, he pronounced O’Keefe guilty and sentenced him to prison. What’s left to report? Exit quotation from Frum: “I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict: the James O’Keefe/Landrieu phone interference case will be resolved with a very stern talking to by a judge, no criminal record, and 100 hours of community service each for the four arrested young people.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

18 U.S.C. § 1036: US Code – Section 1036: Entry by false pretenses to any real property, vessel, or aircraft of the United States or secure area of any airport

(a) Whoever, by any fraud or false pretense, enters or attempts to enter –
(1) any real property belonging in whole or in part to, or
leased by, the United States;
(2) any vessel or aircraft belonging in whole or in part to, or leased by, the United States; or
(3) any secure area of any airport, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section.

(b) The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) of this section is –
(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, if the offense is committed with the intent to commit a felony; or
(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or both, in any other case.

(c) As used in this section –
(1) the term “secure area” means an area access to which is
restricted by the airport authority or a public agency; and
(2) the term “airport” has the meaning given such term in
section 47102 of title 49.

Jimbo3 on January 27, 2010 at 5:47 PM

Does that include the politicians who enter their offices every day by pretending to serve the public good?

I’ll say again entering federal property under false pretenses for the purpose of committing a felony

So conservatives support suspected felons now?

harry on January 27, 2010 at 6:25 PM
Therefore, the burden of proof is up to the feds to prove that they intended to commit a felony, via the thought police. They may have to perform a Vulcan mind meld to prove this.

Harry …good response. How did I know you cannot handle more than one idea at a time?

BTW:

Fox News’ Glenn Beck, who made O’Keefe’s ACORN expose a national phenomenon by championing the videos, said on his radio show that if the allegations against O’Keefe are true, the young man crossed the line.
“You don’t do anything illegal. That’s Watergate territory. You just don’t do that,” Beck said. “But besides that, I don’t even think you go dressed up. I mean, it’s a senator. For the love of Pete, it’s a senator.”

Harry …good response. How did I know you cannot handle more than one idea at a time?

BTW:

Fox News’ Glenn Beck, who made O’Keefe’s ACORN expose a national phenomenon by championing the videos, said on his radio show that if the allegations against O’Keefe are true, the young man crossed the line.
“You don’t do anything illegal. That’s Watergate territory. You just don’t do that,” Beck said. “But besides that, I don’t even think you go dressed up. I mean, it’s a senator. For the love of Pete, it’s a senator.”
CWforFreedom on January 27, 2010 at 7:29 PM

OK. So I agree with Glenn, what’s your point? As I said people on this thread are cheering on the guy, I happen to think breaking the law (if he did) is pretty serious and WRONG.

Saw at Red State that David Shuster is on his way to NO. He’s already got him convicted for wiretapping. I only wish they had been this exuberant about checking out ACORN there. He did go to check them out, didn’t he?

“I’m going to go out on a limb here and predict: the James O’Keefe/Landrieu phone interference case will be resolved with a very stern talking to by a judge, no criminal record, and 100 hours of community service each for the four arrested young people.”

Frum is out of his mind if he thinks federal court works this way.

So conservatives support suspected felons now?

Throwing tea into Boston Harbor, as well as any other act against Great Britain, was a “felony” too. I’m not saying I support what O’Keefe allegedly did, but let’s get all the facts before we condemn O’Keefe. Maybe he was trying to uncover something really important at Landrieu’s office?

I knew it wasn’t a case of wire-tapping… in so far as the affidavit doesn’t claim they were wire-tapping. They were only charged with “entering federal property under false pretense” (i.e.; claiming to be telephone repairmen.) And that’s only for two of the four… O’Keefe and the other dude were charged with aiding and abetting entering federal property under false pretense.

Enoxo on January 27, 2010 at 5:27 PM

It seems clear from reading the other O’Keefe threads that many ConcernCons didn’t read the actual affidavit. Knee jerk reactions abound when misleading thread titles fit their agenda.

They then go on record beating the same drum and when the truth comes out a short 24 hours later, to cover their embarrassment they dig in deeper accusing Breitbart of nuanced obfuscation.

True – but I just wish he weren’t infected with “Conservative Blogger Guilt Syndrome”. He apparently believes the narrative from the left about conservatives – so he rushes too quickly to judgment on our folks without really considering what they’ve done for the cause in the past.

O’Keefe has done great work in exposing ACORN – more than any “blogger” has really ever done. He deserved for us to hold judgment, and even a little bit of support in this case.

I notice now that not too many people are crucifying him – as they did last night. And the reason is – they all realize now what I and others said last night – that O’Keefe is not a stupid dude – and there is more to this story.

18 U.S.C. § 1036: US Code – Section 1036: Entry by false pretenses to any real property, vessel, or aircraft of the United States or secure area of any airport

(a) Whoever, by any fraud or false pretense, enters or attempts to enter –
(1) any real property belonging in whole or in part to, or
leased by, the United States;
(2) any vessel or aircraft belonging in whole or in part to, or leased by, the United States; or
(3) any secure area of any airport, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section.

(b) The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) of this section is –
(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, if the offense is committed with the intent to commit a felony; or
(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or both, in any other case.

(c) As used in this section –
(1) the term “secure area” means an area access to which is
restricted by the airport authority or a public agency; and
(2) the term “airport” has the meaning given such term in
section 47102 of title 49.

Jimbo3 on January 27, 2010 at 5:47 PM

So does this mean we can expect the Bawny Fwank sex ring case to be re-opened soon???

I read the actual affidavit and the pastiche of circumstances was riddled in paradox taking wiretapping as a premised motive. Not much added up. Wiretapping was sloppily applied by those ready to slam conservatives and now some have to eat crow. I favor legal activism nonetheless.

The story is he was trying to prove that the phones were not being answered on purpose. We who call our Democratic senators have sensed this is happening. Still a bit stupid even if it was done for a good reason.

Saw at Red State that David Shuster is on his way to NO. He’s already got him convicted for wiretapping. I only wish they had been this exuberant about checking out ACORN there. He did go to check them out, didn’t he?

silvernana on January 27, 2010 at 7:38 PM

Maybe while Shuster is down there he’ll stop by the ACORN office and do some reporting. But more likely he’ll give them a check for all the “great work” they’re doing on behalf of aspiring criminals across America.

True – but I just wish he weren’t infected with “Conservative Blogger Guilt Syndrome”. He apparently believes the narrative from the left about conservatives – so he rushes too quickly to judgment on our folks without really considering what they’ve done for the cause in the past.

HondaV65 on January 27, 2010 at 8:15 PM

What they’ve done in the past isn’t the relevant point here. You can be a hero and then commit a crime. But the right is bad about agreeing that people on our side are guilty, before the facts are established.

O’Keefe seems to have learned the George Allen lesson. Don’t apologize, because it allows your opponents to attack you even more. Good for him. It’s up to our writers to learn the KOS lesson. Defend your side, loudly, until he’s proven guilty. And then ignore the case.

Stir-the-crap question:
What “false pretense”? Who says they weren’t telephone repair men offering to correct the problems the office has had – Anyone can offer telephone repair services, same as cable and satellite repair guys – unless they specifically stated they worked for Southern Bell (or whatever company is in N.O.), then false pretenses may be hard to prove – heck, I repair phones all the time!
Okeefe obviously wanted to get their reaction on tape after the offer to fix their phones by a couple of guys that were equipped to do it – where’s the felony? Where’s the false pretense? They really were offering to fix the phone lines.

Stir-the-crap question:
What “false pretense”? Who says they weren’t telephone repair men offering to correct the problems the office has had – Anyone can offer telephone repair services, same as cable and satellite repair guys – unless they specifically stated they worked for Southern Bell (or whatever company is in N.O.), then false pretenses may be hard to prove – heck, I repair phones all the time!
Okeefe obviously wanted to get their reaction on tape after the offer to fix their phones by a couple of guys that were equipped to do it – where’s the felony? Where’s the false pretense? They really were offering to fix the phone lines.